The Voice of Treason

I’ve been posting about this political season’s bumper stickers and so has Jay Nordlinger on NRO. This must be a sensitive subject because he’s been getting quite a response from his readers.

“Dear Jay,

Sorry for the vulgarity of it. I have just been steaming about it for a solid hour. And I gotta say something: I can hardly wait for the first time I’m stuck behind that van while my precious eight-year-old daughter is riding shotgun.”

The reader signed himself as living in ‘enemy-occupied Madison, Wis.’ Is there something about living in left-wing communities and these nasty, hateful bumper stickers? I mean, is it simply a cost, of living in these communities?

As you know, I grew up in Ann Arbor, Mich., and these stickers were a dime a dozen. You just accepted them, like mosquitoes (but you had no zapper). Indeed, such hatefulness was one of the reasons — a big reason — I turned, politically, so long ago.

I wonder: Are there equivalent right-wing stickers, in right-wing communities? I never see them, and I never hear about them. Then again, I strain to recall ever being in a right-wing community. Maybe I should get out more…

In any case, America can be a very nasty, coarse, inhospitable place to live. Rah-rah as we are — especially at Thanksgiving time! — we should not kid ourselves.

Let me share one more letter, of a different character:

“Mr. Nordlinger:

I wanted to draw your attention to a bumper sticker that I saw yesterday, reading: ‘Draft Republicans.’

What with the throngs of protesters and ‘activists’ who routinely descend on my hometown of Washington, D.C., I figured I had seen everything. However, as both a Republican and an Iraq vet, I could not help being insulted — more by the sheer arrogance of these people (it was obvious they had no military experience) than by anything else.

I guess I can take comfort in the sacrifices that those who choose to serve, regardless of individual political beliefs, make daily. Knowing how hard it is to be away from your family — particularly at this time of year — I would urge everyone to do a little something extra for our people overseas. You would not believe how much it is appreciated.”

No one on the Right wants to be whiny, of course, but you have to be a complete knucklehead if you compare left-leaning and right-leaning bumper stickers and don’t see that one side is considerably more vicious. And profane. And we on the Right are supposed to be the mean-spirited ones?

Like Nordlinger, I turned, too, and for most of the same reasons. I’ll provide a link to an NRO Symposium – “A Liberal Thanksgiving: We give thanks to the Left side of the table.”

I challenge anyone on the Left to read it and tell me it’s hateful, hurtful, vile, or nasty. I mean, really! Even when one of the contributors tries to be insulting it comes out sounding more like a compliment. (So far I haven’t seen anything reciprocal from the Left on this holiday. Where’s the love?)

“Speaking as a misfit unassimilated foreigner, I think of Thanksgiving as the most American of holidays. Christmas is celebrated elsewhere, even if there are significant local variations: in continental Europe, naughty children get left rods to be flayed with and lumps of coal; in Britain, Christmas lasts from December 22nd to mid-January and celebrates the ancient cultural traditions of massive alcohol intake and watching the telly till you pass out in a pool of your own vomit. All part of the rich diversity of our world.

But Thanksgiving (excepting the premature and somewhat undernourished Canadian version) is unique to America. ‘What’s it about?’ an Irish visitor asked me a couple of years back. ‘Everyone sits around giving thanks all day? Thanks for what? George bloody Bush?’

– Mark Steyn, NRO

Another splendid piece from Mr. Steyn, who reminds us, “Americans should be thankful they have one of the last functioning nation states.” And speaking of George Bush, allow me to post an excerpt from his Thanksgiving greeting:

“Americans are a grateful people, ever mindful of the many ways we have been blessed. On Thanksgiving Day, we lift our hearts in gratitude for the freedoms we enjoy, the people we love, and the gifts of our prosperous land…

Since the first National Day of Thanksgiving was proclaimed by President George Washington, Americans have come together to offer thanks for our many blessings. We recall the great privilege it is to live in a land where freedom is the right of every person and where all can pursue their dreams. We express our deep appreciation for the sacrifices of the honorable men and women in uniform who defend liberty. As they work to advance the cause of freedom, our Nation keeps these brave individuals and their families in our thoughts, and we pray for their safe return.”

Thanksgiving is a time to honor tradition, to be sure, and no one minds if your tradition is different than others’. I’m always encouraged when I see representatives from other cultures in the supermarket filling their shopping carts with typical Thanksgiving foods. (An Asian woman, still struggling with English, stopped to help T and me look for an appropriate sized turkey. She had already scoured the store and knew where all the Butterballs were hiding. If that’s not assimilation I don’t know what is.)

It’s time we recognize that tradition isn’t such a bad word because every one of us subscribes to some sort of … well, traditions. Even Ralph Nader. I mention him because a couple weeks ago I’d stopped what I was doing in the kitchen to watch his segment at the Miami Book Fair. He was speaking to an audience about his most recent work: The Seventeen Traditions. His family, immigrants who settled in the East, sounded a little like my mother’s family, immigrants who settled in the East. Nader’s family was from Lebanon, my mother’s family was from Italy. Two different places, two different cultures, but many of the traditions were the same.

In fact, the ones Nader lists sound downright American. Like a Thanksgiving potluck, everyone in America contributes something to the holiday table. Peruse his list and pick out the ones that sound like your family.

1. The Tradition of Listening
2. The Tradition of the Family Table
3. The Tradition of Health
4. The Tradition of History
5. The Tradition of Scarcity
6. The Tradition of Sibling Equality
7. The Tradition of Education and Argument
8. The Tradition of Discipline
9. The Tradition of Simple Enjoyments
10. The Tradition of Reciprocity
11. The Tradition of Independent Thinking
12. The Tradition of Charity
13. The Tradition of Work
14. The Tradition of Business
15. The Tradition of Patriotism
16. The Tradition of Solitude
17. The Tradition of Civics

Funny, I’d just posted something on Saturday about bumper stickers and now Jay Nordlinger offers another note from a reader:

A letter from Seattle:

“On my way to work today I saw the following bumper sticker: ‘So Many Right-wing Christians, So Few Lions.’ I have lived most of my life in this area, but I’m still sometimes surprised at how supposedly tolerant liberals here have no hesitation in saying the most hateful things.”

One never quite gets used to it, does one?

Wow. If this gentle reader is wounded by that sticker – fairly benign compared to hundreds of others I’ve seen – I’d keep her far away from this one:

“Much like the facts of September 11th, once you see them it becomes clear it was an Inside Job. As subtitle suggests, A Mathematical Conclusion, Not an Optical Illusion.”

Hmmm. Or you could just put a sticker on your car that says: “Watch out — I’m nuttier than squirrel scat!”

Even National Review recently gave credit to Bill Clinton (“Thank you, Mr. President”) for interrupting a Truther at a campaign rally to ask:

“How dare you? How dare you?”

This after Bill Maher went on record just within the last few weeks, insisting that even he doesn’t believe the Bush administration was behind the attacks. Chris Matthews was on with Maher that night and laughed that laugh during the confrontation with the Truther, but not long after I saw him at the Miami Book Fair, and when a nutjob in line asked him about the JFK assassination and then 9/11, Matthews wasn’t laughing.

The audience member asked Matthews if he really believed Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy and if he believed WTC 7 wasn’t brought down intentionally. Matthews didn’t hesitate – he said yes, he was a believer. The questioner wasn’t convinced.

“Why?”

“Because I’m sane.”

Proof that there really are things both sides can agree on.

“… Webster, Worcester, and Bouvier all define a citizen to be a person in the United States, entitled to vote and hold office. The only question left to be settled now is: Are women persons?

And I hardly believe any of our opponents will have the hardihood to say they are not. Being persons, then, women are citizens; and no state has a right to make any law, or to enforce any old law, that shall abridge their privileges or immunities. Hence, every discrimination against women in the constitutions and laws of the several states is today null and void, precisely as is every one against Negroes.”

– Susan B. Anthony, On Women’s Right to Vote

David Freddoso on NRO notes that Susan B. Anthony was arrested 135 years ago today:

Michael Zak sends along another piece of history, interesting in the light of Kate O’Beirne’s piece on single female voters in this week’s dead-tree issue of NR:

“On this day in 1872, Susan B. Anthony was arrested for casting a ballot in the election two weeks before. In a letter to another famed suffragist, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Anthony boasted of having voted for ‘the Republican ticket — straight.’”

Really? Is this true? I’m no Anthony expert, so someone check this for me: Did Susan B. Anthony vote for the incumbent, Ulysses S. Grant? Or did she vote for the Liberal Republican, Horace Greeley (who was also on the Democrat ticket)? Wait — but wasn’t there a woman in the race? Victoria Woodhull, who was jailed on Election Day for indecency? And wasn’t her running mate abolitionist and former slave Frederick Douglass?

I’m so confused. Wouldn’t Susan B. Anthony have automatically supported the woman candidate? And wouldn’t she have supported Douglass, her longtime friend and confidant? One would think she would, of course, but it appears our Susan was nuanced, and she and Douglass found themselves on opposite sides over the 15th Amendment.

“It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union. And we formed it, not to give the blessings of liberty, but to secure them; not to the half of ourselves and the half of our posterity, but to the whole people - women as well as men. And it is a downright mockery to talk to women of their enjoyment of the blessings of liberty while they are denied the use of the only means of securing them provided by this democratic-republican government - the ballot.”

Imagine: She had supported the rights of blacks to secure the vote, yet when they got it they did not reciprocate and support the same rights for women. And Douglass never really signed on to the nomination, probably because there wasn’t a snowball’s chance in Hell that Woodhull could be elected. (She wasn’t yet 35. Undoubtedly one of those “impediments” Hillary was talking about the other night.)

But Susan was also adamant about that demon alcohol; why would she support Grant who was known to have been… uh, intemperate? I can only surmise that she, a woman of strong convictions, supported the party of Lincoln… for obvious reasons.

And she devoted her life to suffrage so that we with ovaries could exercise this right to vote?

“Women should give up the vote. We asked for it, we got it, the world’s never been more jumbled — so we should get rid of it.”

– Mercedes McCambridge

It’s strange, too, to think that so many of the suffragists were anti-abortion. But of course it would make sense. If a person would fight for the rights of all citizens, and work as an advocate for blacks and women, why would it not make sense for that person to support the rights of children, either born or still in the womb, as individuals?

Hmm. I hope Susan’s not spinning as I type.

Mr. Nordlinger,

– National Review Online

Ditto – even though it’s sometimes difficult to find them on the ballot. Still, when they exist, I look for and support the adults in the race. Speaking of bumper stickers, I admit I really enjoy looking at the variety of them online, but as tempting as it is, I have been driving since I was fifteen and have only put one political sticker on a car. I was… uh, young.

Checking out other drivers’ bumper stickers, however, allows me to get a feel for our local political climate, so I’m always on the lookout for new ones. I see plenty of anti-Bush, anti-war, anti-Christian messages, but those are outnumbered by stickers and magnets that are supportive of the troops. This doesn’t necessarily translate into pro-Bush, pro-war, pro-Christian, of course, but troop support is always a fine sentiment and it’s good to see so much of it.

There’s a sticker for that, too:

“Slapping a yellow ribbon on the back of your gas-guzzling SUV during a war for oil makes you look like an asshole.”

And a sort-of response:

“If you agree with Al Gore, should you really be driving right now?”

I still see a lot of stickers from the previous presidential election: Bush/Cheney and Kerry/Edwards. I actually saw a Gore/Lieberman sticker not long ago and had to look at it twice to confirm. Kucinich stickers are still out there from last time, but those are mainly around the UNM campus. Once in a while I’ll see one for Nader, too.

I saw my first Code Pink sticker recently, and I’m starting to see the standard Nuevo Mexico Democrat four-wheeled billboards on the road. Those are the cars that display at least one sticker – sometimes more – for each Democrat running in an upcoming election. So it isn’t unusual to see a Bill Richardson sticker next to a Martin Heinrich sticker… next to a Richardson sticker next to a Heinrich sticker. (Sigh. More on Martin another time.)

I’ve seen a few Obama stickers out and about, but no Edwards stickers. (I had noticed it would be fairly simple to trim “Kerry” off the old ones, but I get the feeling it wouldn’t be worth the effort.) Haven’t seen a single pro-Hillary sticker. Now that strikes me as a little odd. I have seen one anti-Hillary sticker, though, and that’s comforting.

Ron Paul stickers? One would think they’d be everywhere, proportionate to the nutjobbery in the world, but I must not be looking in the right places. And if there are any other 2008 Republican candidates’ stickers I’ve missed them. But this isn’t surprising for two reasons: 1) Republicans are still taking their time and mulling over this group, and 2) most Republicans are adults.

“You know it’s summertime at Candlestick when the fog rolls in, the wind kicks up, and you see the center fielder slicing open a caribou to survive the ninth inning.”

– Bob Sarlette

I love this quote because it reminds me of all those times we’d drive up to Candlestick for a face full of blowing debris and hypothermia. It was so frigid at one game that T broke down (the will to survive pushes one to the most extreme limits) and purchased the only item he could find that wasn’t a full-blown advertisement for a team we despised: a long sleeved black turtleneck with a small Giants patch on the neck that could be easily obscured by turning the turtleneck down over it. (I never had to sink so low because I, the Queen of Layers, know how to dress appropriately for any weather event. Another advantage of growing up Chicagoan.)

So why do I dislike the Giants so much? Their fans – both of them – are snarky and mean, and Willie Mays deliberately ran over Randy Hundley at the plate – Hundley, who had possibly the worst knees in baseball, and Mays just mowed him over. Yes, I know it’s been a few decades, but I’ve been known to hold a grudge.

However… the bright spot of going to the Stick: Talking to people like Andy Van Slyke and Jim Leyland. Another bright spot: Taunting Barry.

News of the Day: Barry Bonds Iz Goin’ To Da Big House

Is it a black mark on baseball? No, actually this might just be a bright spot.

Boxers or Briefs? Diamonds or Pearls? Human Rights or National Security?

Another Democrat debate. Look, Joe Biden’s a real pip, but I had to laugh when Chris Matthews suggested that he could be our next Secretary of State. And the Democrats are the ones talking about the importance of diplomacy?

Hilldog’s response to the faux question “Diamonds or Pearls?” was merely another reminder of how greedy the Clintons are. I WANT BOTH! Absolutely the wrong answer, but I get the feeling I’m the only one who thinks so.

The Rose of The Rio Grande

Govzilla speaks. Human rights? Important – yes. Security? Sure, yeah, but not as important as those human rights. Sounds good at first until you remember that people are trying to kill us. I’m a human, an American, and I know I have certain unalienable Rights. You people get paid to take care of the security part. And I’ll lose my rights if you don’t preserve, protect, and defend, so the way I see it is: Security is job one. Get to work, yes?

And why is our governor still out there promising that he’ll deliver to America what he can’t even deliver to Nuevo Mexico? The “Education President?” He’s even promising to create more jobs. What — more call centers? Cue Nuevo Mexico’s theme song:

“WE ARE THE (THIRD) WORLD, WE ACT LIKE CHIIILLLDRUNNN…”

Speaking of theme songs, cue the theme from The X-Files…

Why is Dennis Kucinich, who has turned rather surly lately, still in this race?

Ramesh or Dinesh?

No, they’re not interchangeable. But Ramesh has written an article about which pundits are supporting which candidate. He likes McCain, but points out that a lot of pro-life conservatives are with Giuliani. Part of it, of course, is that they are New Yorkers who appreciate that the Mayor made their city liveable again. But I also believe that they believe Giuliani when he says he’ll nominate Justices like Alito and Scalia. Paisans? I tend to think that Giuliani would make the right choices, but getting Alitos and Scalias confirmed is another matter entirely.

Still, I’d rather support that than any of the Dems who, at the debate, admitted they have a litmus test: The next Supreme Court Justice must be pro-choice, a woman, or blatantly biased towards particular groups of Americans – or all of the above.

Like a former (less-than-conservative) Republican president once said:

“Our Chief Justices have probably had more profound and lasting influence in their times and on the direction of the nation than most presidents.”

Giuliani’s people might want to work that into his campaign speeches if they haven’t already.

Two Girls and A Cup: Why Social Issues Really Are Important

If you haven’t yet seen the video online, look for it, then tell me why social issues aren’t an issue. And with conviction, if possible.

I was at the computer, drinking my coffee – thick, no sugar ever, only an occasional splash of half ‘n’ half – while listening to Neal Boortz and I’d just come in on the part about a University of New Mexico student who wants the government to pay for her birth control so she can use her resources for cell phone bills and gym membership.

Flashback to my college days and me standing in line at the drug store to purchase my oral contraceptives. It seemed like every time I went in there to buy them the price had crept up a little more. “It’s getting expensive,” I sniveled.

The pharmacist looked up from the register and glared at me.

“Consider the alternative.”

“Excellent point,” I said, and I never sniveled again.

It reminds me a bit of the conversation I’d mentioned with my three liberal women friends. All three are single mothers who raised their kids by themselves, and two of them have daughters who recently graduated from college and are beginning their careers. One has just realized that she doesn’t want to do what she studied and is now certified to do.

“Not only that, but then she and her boyfriend found out that she was pregnant, and then… she decided she didn’t want to be pregnant anymore.”

Sorry, it’s become a reflex. I was going to say something, of course, but there was something else that stopped me in my tracks. So I bit my tongue. I saw the look on her face when she said it and I heard something in her voice. That the other two women were so silent, told me I really didn’t have to say anything.

Like I said, I watched parts of that Miami Book Fair on C-SPAN 2 last weekend and sat through segments with people like Ralph Nader and ol’ Chris. No offense, but after some of the recent news stories coming out of Florida and watching the Fair attendees in queue to ask questions, someone should really write a book: “What’s The Matter With Florida?”

It’s old, it’s tired, it’s time to put 2000 to rest. I mean, ever since that whole butterfly ballot thing down there, I’ve had some serious doubts about those Floridians. In the past I’ve had to use the same ballot, and I’m not the sharpest quill in the porcupine, but even I managed to figure it out. Please – for your own sake – just stop reminding us how stupid you are.

But there was something interesting about that Book Fair: an underlying theme that people on the Right and on the Left could actually find things to agree on and come together. Well, sure. Come together and start attacking each other again. Sorry, it’s an old habit that’s hard to break, but I guess that’s politics. It’s like that Huckabee remark about Romney this week. The former governor of Massachusetts criticized the former governor of Arkansas for his position on in-state tuition for illegals, and Huckabee came back with some comment about Romney not wanting these students to be able to go to college – he’d rather have them working in his front yard. Huckabee’s known for his quick wit and oratory skills, but there was just something about that line that really rubbed me the wrong way.

I used to call him the Anti-Clinton, but I’ve stopped that. To tell you the truth, I’m not seeing all that much of the “anti” lately. These little flickers of… I don’t know… is it fair to call them meanness? Or is it just annoying self-righteousness? Look, Mike, I have a personal immigrant. This new one’s older than me – her mother’s 91 – but we meet each week so she can improve her English skills and prepare for her G.E.D. I am her personal American. Her tutor. I am a volunteer. So is she. Key word here: volunteer.

And that reminds me. I was watching MSNBC (don’t ask) and I heard David Shuster describe Tom Tancredo as a “border-control fanatic.” (I had to call T into the room and play that one back for him.) It’s campaign time and there’s a lot of talk about the issues, but I think pundits and strategerists on both sides are underestimating the importance of this whole illegals debate. Illegal immigration and securing the borders is not a one party issue.

Nuevo Mexico, if you didn’t know, is one of the states that issues driver’s licenses to illegals. We have illegals everywhere and everyone knows it. I do appreciate the ones who are at least trying to communicate in English – like the two men in the grocery store who watched me bag some Brussels sprouts, then asked me to explain what they were and how a person might want to use them. (I must have lit up like a Christmas tree. Anyone who knows me knows I can go on for days about sprouts.)

But it’s naïve to believe that all exchanges between us and them are perfectly benign. I met up with three women friends this week and I don’t think they would mind if I described them as Liberals. (They call me an anarchist, so I figure we’re even.) I was really surprised at how much of our dinner conversation involved illegal immigration. This is a first, I thought to myself. What exactly has happened here?

Sure, a mutual friend of ours was almost beaten to death last year by an illegal – and she might even have had dinner with us except that she won’t leave her house anymore. You know the old joke: A conservative is a liberal who’s just been mugged. But that isn’t the reason for the shift in opinion. All three women are dealing with issues that aren’t just some nebulous political theories. The issues are where they work and they’re being directly affected by specific policies.

Let me start with Friend Number One. An exuberant personality with an MFA, working in a position she is clearly overqualified for and that has very little to do with her education. And a longtime Nuevo Mexico resident. She has been promoted to a supervisory position and is in charge of hiring part-time employees. A new boss has been introduced to the company. He’s also new to the state and wants to “tap into all that New Mexican talent.” He has announced that he wants to establish an all Spanish-speaking team at work.

I shoot a quick glance around the table. All eyebrows are raised. We’ve lived here long enough to know the code. He wants a team of illegals. Friend points out that only one of the current supervisors speaks Spanish. She also explains that this is Nuevo Mexico and it’s hard enough to find and hire people who speak English to actually show up to work. Soon the supervisors are told that the new boss has clarified his position: It was a bilingual team he wanted. Sure it was. Friend is currently exploring other employment opportunities, and for the first time since I’ve known her she is seriously considering leaving the state when her partner relocates his business to another part of the country.

Yes, another Nuevo Mexican business leaving Nuevo Mexico. Just can’t say enough about that New Mexican talent, I tell ya. (Some of our dinner conversation involved placing bets on when Intel in Rio Rancho would be packing up and leaving the state. Friend Number Two says she has inside information. Two years, she insists.)

This friend has just taken on more responsibility since a coworker suffered her third CVA. (“Three strokes and you’re out,” I said.) Part of what she does now is to review specific criminal information about a very specific demographic. This information is then reviewed by a panel who makes a decision based on the information. But before any decisions are made, another group demands to review the material and influence the decision-making. The National Council of La Raza.

Excuse me? But the topper came from Friend Number Three who works for the same… uh, entity, shall we say, as Friend Two. She’s in an area that reviews specific information about specificities that would allow certain people to obtain driver’s licenses. An employee who describes herself as “kind-hearted” was approached by a person with a convincing sob story. She went into the database, altered the information, issued a false certificate, then re-entered the correct information. I like to think of this as forging documents, but then I’m a bit of a nitpicker.

This did not happen once. The… uh, entity is aware of at least 200 incidents. Has the employee been terminated? Brought up on criminal charges? No, she’s on paid leave. (Thank you, Union!) And what about the person with the sob story? The illegal whose name is Juan? Juan still cruises the office. Friend Number Three and her coworkers are stressed, but have been instructed to stop discussing the matter. Like Friend Number One, she is currently seeking alternative employment opportunities.

“So… this Juan person and your little coworker are falsifying documents for illegals and it isn’t an issue.”

“No! It is an issue! I mean, isn’t this a Homeland Security issue?”

“Well, one would think…”

I have to disagree with Shuster. Tancredo is no fanatic. He only seems to be because everyone around him is so unbelievably unconscious.

“Nobody can be exactly like me. Even I have trouble doing it.”

– Tallulah Bankhead

T and I decided to take advantage of global warming down here in Nuevo Mexico last week, so we took a long walk on what looked and felt like a beautiful spring day – well, as long as we didn’t pay too much attention to the color of the autumn leaves. Anyway, I brought up Hillary and the mild kerfuffle generated by her campaign trail hoarseness.

“I can’t believe how few people got the reference. I mean, people actually said they’d never heard of Tallulah Bankhead.”

“Who’s Tallulah Bankhead?”

Okay, maybe Obama really is onto something with that “generational” strategery, who knows? But the whole thing was still nagging at me. Why Tallulah? After all, there are plenty of other women with low, husky voices that Hillary could have compared herself to. Why not good Democrat Lauren Bacall or Kathleen Turner? Barbara Stanwyck, perhaps. Peggy Lee. Oh – and wouldn’t Mercedes McCambridge have been an interesting choice? And can you just imagine what would have happened if she had paused, cleared her throat, and said:

“Hmmm. I sound like Jeane Kirkpatrick.”

One doesn’t get the impression that Senator Clinton is spontaneous, so why Tallulah? Miss Bankhead was a woman who had more layers than an onion. Still, parallels can be drawn: She liked children, baseball, moved from a Southern state that starts with an “A” to New York, and reportedly had conversations with Eleanor Roosevelt. But these weren’t really the things Tallulah would be best remembered for. Again, why Tallulah?

Just a throwaway line? Perhaps, but doubtful. Some interpreted Hillary’s remark as a shout-out to the LGBT crowd, and that’s certainly a possibility. Others disagree: Why would she want to dredge up old rumors? Frankly, if I were married to Bill Clinton, I might be turned off by men, too. But I doubt that Hillary made the comparison for that reason. I mean, look at me. I am an unmarried woman of a certain age who drives a Subaru Outback and has been seen tossing 40 pound bags of kibble into it. I wear sensible shoes. Since shaving my head two years ago, I’ve consistently worn my hair cropped short. Because I’m tall, have shoulders, and my arms are long enough to tie my shoes without bending over, I tend to keep an unusual number of men’s shirts in my closets. I like baseball, big dogs, and sturdy beer. I adore Florence King and have been known to listen to k.d. lang. Am I bisexual? A lesbian? Uh… no. I admit women can be interesting to watch, but then so is decomposition.

I’ll cut Hilldog some slack here – I might have said Tallulah, too. Why? Quite simply, because I have always appreciated the woman’s quick wit and what I like to call her “Algonquinisms.” So why Tallulah? I think Hillary just wanted to prove that she really is a fun girl. As fun as decomposition, perhaps, but fun nonetheless.

Which reminds me of something Chris Matthews said at that Miami Book Fair over the weekend. He suggested that Hillary could win because “men listen to women.” Well, it’s hard to avoid it, Chris, because we’re always talking at them. But his point was, I think, that women would make the lives of the men around them miserable if they didn’t vote for the girl. Then came the “wink, wink, nudge, nudge, you know what I’m talkin’ about guys” thing. I tell you, it sent a chill up my spine.

Is Chris Matthews suggesting that American men are that whipped? I hope he’s just speaking for himself here. Look. T and I usually go to the polls together when it’s a big election, and we generally review the ballot together before we head out to register our votes. But once we get there something happens. We separate. He goes into a booth, I go into a booth. We vote separately. We vote alone.

After all these years of being legal, one of the things about our system that still energizes me is that I can go into a voting booth and choose whatever I want. Whatever I want. None of this “I’d really like to order the cheesecake, but I know I should get the melon slice.” No, I can enter that booth and have that cheesecake. Outside that booth I can say one thing, then go inside and do another if I want to. Not that I’ve ever done that, but knowing that I could is what’s exciting. And then I don’t have to tell anyone – anyone – what I’ve just done. It’s the only real secret left.

So what the hell is Chris Matthews saying? Are there women out there who actually stand outside the booth then demand to see their partners’ ballots? “I want to see proof that you voted the way you were supposed to!” It wouldn’t even occur to me to violate T’s privacy that way. He’s an adult. Unlike the average Floridian, he understands how the ballot works. He is capable of doing research. He is capable of forming opinions. He is capable of making decisions. His own decisions.

I used to hear stories about women who said they voted the way their husbands “instructed” them to, and I always thought that was odd. Have that many women become those men? Gee whiz, what kind of harridans does Chris Matthews associate with?

5/13/90

Love, Jimmy

This is a letter from our former president, addressed to his sister-in-law Sybil Carter. I thought of him earlier in the week when I watched George Bush, another former president, jump out of an airplane.

“I’d like to see Jimmy Carter do that,” I said to myself. “Sans parachute, of course.”

See, I’d intended to post something about the conduct of former presidents and how Carter often portrays himself as someone capable of walking on water. It made me wonder if he leapt from a plane without a chute, would he sprout angel’s wings and float safely down to earth? If only we could test this theory.

But I decided not to post because I thought it might be… well, small and bitter – much like our former president. Then I saw the cat letter and changed my mind.